Validation-Frontier Representation Selection under Constrained Observation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15095v1
• Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 07:40:39 GMT
• Title: Validation-Frontier Representation Selection under Constrained Observation
• Abstract summary: This paper studies representation selection under constrained observation.<n>We propose a validation-frontier selector that combines balanced accuracy with penalties for feature cost, overfit gap, and validation-test instability.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: AI systems deployed outside clean benchmark settings often rely on observations that are incomplete, unstable, costly, or degraded by monitoring failures. This paper studies representation selection under constrained observation: choosing a state representation when raw accuracy is not the only operational criterion. We propose a validation-frontier selector that combines balanced accuracy with penalties for feature cost, overfit gap, and validation-test instability. In a focused public-tabular benchmark using three scikit-learn datasets, five observation regimes, 45 matched task cells, 720 candidate actions, and 405 representation rows, the adaptive selector improves frontier score over full trace features by 0.025801 while reducing mean feature count by 22.733. Balanced-accuracy difference is small and not statistically significant. A broader offline stress test gives mixed results. The supported claim is therefore bounded: adaptive representation selection can improve a constrained-observation robustness-efficiency frontier in matched benchmark settings, but does not universally dominate trace baselines.

Related papers

• SVR: Self-Verifying Refinement via Joint Verdict-Confidence Reinforcement Learning for Adaptive Test-Time Compute [62.3458279176813]
  Self-Verifying Refinement is an oracle-free multi-turn reinforcement learning framework.<n>It learns to use self-verification as a compute-control policy.<n>It achieves a macro-average accuracy of 0.563 with only 2.99 inference turns on average.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-30T16:20:58Z)
• Pause and Reflect: Conformal Aggregation for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [8.024041325202612]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning with self-consistency improves performance by aggregating multiple sampled reasoning paths.<n>We introduce a conformal procedure for CoT reasoning that directly addresses aggregation uncertainty.<n>Our approach replaces majority voting with weighted score aggregation over reasoning paths and calibrates an abstention rule using conformal risk control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T20:33:59Z)
• Alignment Imprint: Zero-Shot AI-Generated Text Detection via Provable Preference Discrepancy [51.887915969023965]
  We show that modern Large Language Models (LLMs) undergo alignment, leaving a measurable distributional imprint.<n>To mitigate the instability in high-entropy regions, we introduce Log-likelihood Alignment Preference Discrepancy (LAPD)<n>LAPD is a standardized information-weighted statistic based on alignment imprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-18T09:12:24Z)
• Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models [94.68358825189738]
  We propose a post-training framework for verifiable domains that jointly optimize prediction accuracy and reasoning quality.<n>We evaluate VPS on chess, a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals.<n>VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T15:19:46Z)
• Deterministic Fuzzy Triage for Legal Compliance Classification and Evidence Retrieval [0.0]
  Legal teams increasingly use machine learning to triage large volumes of contractual evidence.<n>Many models are opaque, non-deterministic, and difficult to align with frameworks such as HIPAA or NERC-CIP.<n>We study a simple, reproducible alternative based on deterministic dual encoders and transparent fuzzy triage bands.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-08T00:31:34Z)
• Don't stop me now: Rethinking Validation Criteria for Model Parameter Selection [3.219880761967806]
  We study how the validation criterion used for model selection affects test performance in neural classifiers.<n>Early stopping based on validation accuracy performs worst, consistently selecting checkpoints with lower test accuracy.<n>Loss-based validation criteria yield comparable and more stable test accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-25T16:56:14Z)
• Unsupervised Conformal Inference: Bootstrapping and Alignment to Control LLM Uncertainty [49.19257648205146]
  We propose an unsupervised conformal inference framework for generation.<n>Our gates achieve close-to-nominal coverage and provide tighter, more stable thresholds than split UCP.<n>The result is a label-free, API-compatible gate for test-time filtering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T23:40:47Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Suitability Filter: A Statistical Framework for Classifier Evaluation in Real-World Deployment Settings [33.080398349395686]
  We propose a novel framework designed to detect performance deterioration by utilizing suitability signals.<n>We aggregate suitability signals for both test and user data and compare these empirical distributions.<n>This enables proactive mitigation of potential failures in high-stakes applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T13:37:04Z)
• Discovering Bias in Latent Space: An Unsupervised Debiasing Approach [6.67121343477106]
  Question-answering capabilities of foundation models are highly sensitive to prompt variations. We propose to rectify this bias directly in the model's internal representation. We empirically show that SteerFair significantly reduces instruction-tuned model performance variance across prompt modifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T21:29:09Z)
• Tune it the Right Way: Unsupervised Validation of Domain Adaptation via Soft Neighborhood Density [125.64297244986552]
  We propose an unsupervised validation criterion that measures the density of soft neighborhoods by computing the entropy of the similarity distribution between points. Our criterion is simpler than competing validation methods, yet more effective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-24T17:41:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.